Re: Tips sought for optimizing 10.4.10's performance

On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 05:03:43 -0700, Bob Harris replied
(in article <nospam.News.Bob-A2931B.08021127062007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):

In article
<0001HW.C2A709EE0002503CF0407530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Eric P. <ericpNOSPAM06@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:38:51 -0700, Bob Harris replied
(in article <nospam.News.Bob-E2621F.20371726062007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):

In article
<0001HW.C2A679AF0006FACAF0407530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Eric P. <ericpNOSPAM06@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hello,

After only a few days of use, I can already tell that OS X 10.4.10 is
an improvement over 10.4.9 in some ways. Still, I'm interested in
whatever I can do to maximize system performance, or (if this is a
better approach) to find the optimal balance between speed and
stability. When in doubt, I'll always choose stability.

So, I'm interested in any tips, good maintenance habits, and/or leads
to sources of information on how to achieve the fastest, most stable OS
X system on my G4 Quicksilver (single 1.47GHz Processor, 512MB RAM).
I'm not at all afraid of the Terminal, as I've had some exposure to
UNIX in the past.

TIA and happy computing,
Eric


================================================================
Hogwasher: You don't have to sacrifice friendliness for power
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.pl?58/hogwasher.html
================================================================

RAM, but depending on what you are doing there is a limit after
which more does not translate to better performance, just lighter
wallet. If you're doing graphics or video editing, even more RAM.
If just reading email and surfing the web, 1GB to maybe 1.5GB
should be more than enough assuming you want to keep lots of stuff
open currently. If you are a 10 to 20 apps open at once type
then maybe 2GB but that may be still be over kill.

I work with images in Photoshop quite a bit, and this machine will
eventually be transformed into an audio engineering workstation, which
may mean that my old Sawtooth will have to serve for all other purposes
(Office apps, image editing, Internet access, and gaming), till I'm
ready to replace it with something better...or retire it, have the
Quicksilver take over those functions, and get a newer, better machine
to be the audio workstation.

RAM is a can-do; I just confirmed to buy a pair of 512MB DIMMs, which
will combine with the largest module I currently have installed to max
out this machine at 1.5GB...at least I'm reasonably sure that the G4
Quicksilver can take a maximum of 1.5GB.

Faster disk drives. If you do not have 7200 RPM disks, then
upgrade to disks with those speeds. If you can get 16MB cache on
the disks even better.

I know my external FW HD is that speed, but I don't know if the same is
true for the internal HD in the QS. How may I determine this? Also
don't know how to determine the caches.

Use Applications -> Utilities -> System Profiler and find the disk
make and model. Then do a google search and you should be able to
find some specs on the drive.

Most desktop drives have been 7200 RPM, but some of the earlier
7200 RPM disks have only had 2MB of cache.

From what I can gather, both the internal Western Digital and the
external LaCie are at 7200rpm, and have 8MB of cache each. They'll have
to do for now, as I'm not ready to spend any more money on hw, except
for a video card. The pair of 512MB DIMMs I'm buying alone are running
me just over $150 US, and that's not small potatoes from where I sit
now.

Thanks,
Eric


================================================================
Hogwasher: You don't have to sacrifice friendliness for power
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.pl?58/hogwasher.html
================================================================

.

Relevant Pages

  • CPU Speed
    ... I also have a Thinkpad that a friend gave me recently which runs Linux Debian, ... cache size: 256 KB ... ram: 256 MB ... Although I'm beginning to understand that more RAM doesn't mean faster computer, I would think that since both speeds are close ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: CPU Speed
    ... Thinkpad that a friend gave me recently which runs Linux Debian, ... cache size: 256 KB ... ram: 256 MB ... speeds are close that they would be ...
    (Debian-User)
  • Re: Does more RAM really help?
    ... to Scott Mueller who was explaning how RAM ... microprocessor and Intel claims to have a 9/10 'cache hit ratio'. ... And this is why RAM speeds today are so much slower than CPU ... CACHE memory exists to store snippets of "action" code that the ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)
  • Re: More memory but slower or less memory but faster
    ... long to access data from main RAM as it does from cache (plus or minus a few ... depending on RAM and bus speeds) ... ...
    (uk.comp.homebuilt)
  • Re: Optimization problem
    ... CPU core and is able to respond to the CPU at full speed (i.e. read or ... each of the four CPU cores has 32 KBytes of L1 cache for data (and ... When you go out of L2 cache as well, the CPU must rely on the plain RAM. ... harddisk) is really called _paging_. ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)